Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:40:08.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Interpretation of the Philippine Election of 1953*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Harold F. Gosnell
Harold F. Gosnell
Affiliation:
American University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Conditions for the successful operation of the democratic form of government have not been present in the Orient. Democracy requires a people who have confidence in themselves, in their leaders, and in the democratic processes, and who have the means for operating democratic institutions. Included in the tools that make democracy work are literacy, a willingness to abide by the rules of the game, and a rapid means of communication and transportation. In the Orient a fatalistic view regarding government is widespread. People in the lower income groups feel that government is an institution of the few, by the few, and for the few. Vote buying, spoils politics, favoritism, nepotism, grafting, the squeeze, the hold up, the percentage are all taken for granted. As one Filipino senator put it, “Graft and corruption are inherent in human nature.” The Orient also suffers from the primitive character of means of transportation and communications. Roads are bad, newspapers have limited circulations, telephones and telegraph stations are few, radios are scarce, and travel is often complicated by hazards of water, mountainous terrain, bandits, and wild animals.

The Philippine elections of November 10, 1953 show that the difficulties that have hindered the growth of democracy in the Orient can be overcome. Before the elections apprehension was widespread that extensive use might be made of fraud and terror to defeat the free expression of the popular will.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 1954 , pp. 1128 - 1138
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gosnell, Harold F., Democracy: Threshold of Freedom (New York, 1948)Google Scholar; McKeon, Richard and Stein, Rokkan, Democracy in a World of Tensions; A Symposium Prepared by UNESCO (Chicago, 1951)Google Scholar; Strausz-Hupé, Robert and Possony, Stefan T., International Relations in the Age of Conflict between Democracy and Dictatorship (New York, 1950)Google Scholar.

2 SenatorAvelino, José, quoted by Philippines Herald, Oct. 21, 1953Google Scholar.

3 Gosnell, Harold F., “Filipinos Hold Free Election”, National Municipal Review, Vol. 43, pp. 120–22 (March, 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Durdin, T., “Philippines Awaits a New Deal”, Reporter, Vol. 10, pp. 17–19 (Jan. 5, 1954)Google Scholar; Durdin, T., “Filipino Emerges as a New Asian Leader”, New York Times Magazine, Nov. 22, 1953, p. 17Google Scholar; Romulo, C. P., “Right Man Wins”, Atlantic, Vol. 193, pp. 50–52 (Feb., 1954)Google Scholar.

4 Hayden, C. Ralston, The Philippines, A Study of National Development (New York, 1942)Google Scholar.

5 The returns were: Roxas, 1,333,392; Osmeña, 1,129,996.

6 Bernard Seeman and Laurence Salisbury, Cross-Currents in the Philippines (American Council, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1946)Google Scholar. This discussion has a curious blind spot on the Communist leadership in the Huk movement. On the party system in the Philippines, see Hayden, op. cit.; Aruego, José M., Philippine Government in Action (Manila, 1953)Google Scholar; Malcolm, George A., First Malayan Republic, The Story of the Philippines (Boston, 1951)Google Scholar.

7 Manila Sunday Times Magazine, Oct. 25, 1953, pp. 14–16Google Scholar; Nivera, C. F., “Political Review”, in Philippine Yearbook 1950–1951 (Manila, 1951), p. 108Google Scholar.

8 Malcolm, , First Malayan Republic (cited in note 6), p. 185Google Scholar; Seeman, and Salisbury, , Cross-Currents in the Philippines (cited in note 6), p. 22Google Scholar; Abaya, Hernando J., Betrayal in the Philippines (New York, 1946)Google Scholar.

9 Malcolm, p. 301; “The Tenant in Malacanan”, Manila Sunday Times Magazine, Oct. 25, 1953, pp. 14–16Google Scholar; José L. Guevara, “LP Chances in the Elections,” Ibid., Oct. 25, 1953, pp. 30–31; Tetizos, Isidro L., “Why the LP Is Confident of Victory”, Counter-Point, Manila, Oct. 20, 1953, pp. 2–3Google Scholar.

10 Nivera, “Political Review” (cited in note 7). The 1953 presidential elections marked a high point in popular participation in the Philippines as a whole. In spite of this, the vote cast in 1949 in the provinces of Negros Occidental and Lanao was far higher than it was in 1953. In Lanao 150 per cent of the estimated number of eligible voters were registered in 1951, according to the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL.)

11 Fifield, Russell H., “The Hukbalahap Today”, Far Eastern Survey, Vol. 20, pp. 13–18 (Jan. 24, 1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Mr. Magsaysay said on October 17, 1953, in a speech; “Ask Mr. Quirino if it is not true that the United States refused to enter into the military assistance pact unless he first cleaned out the corruption and inefficiency of his armed forces. Ask him if it is not true that when he suggested that I be made Secretary of National Defense, the American negotiators promptly agreed, and only then was the pact concluded.” Philippines Free Press, Oct. 31, 1953, p. 55Google Scholar.

13 Shaplen, Robert, “Huks, Foe in the Philippines”, Colliers, Vol. 127, pp. 11–13 (April 7, 1951)Google Scholar, and “Letter from Manila”, New Yorker, Vol. 27, p. 96 (April 7, 1951)Google Scholar; Time, “Cleanup Man”, Vol. 58, pp. 33–34 (Nov. 26, 1951)Google Scholar; Worden, W. L., “Robin Hood of the Islands”, Saturday Evening Post, Vol. 224, pp. 26–27 (Jan. 12, 1952)Google Scholar; Fey, H. W., “Changes in the Philippines”, Christian Century, Vol. 69, pp. 119–21 (Jan. 30, 1952)Google Scholar; Bullitt, W. C., “No Peace in the Philippines”, Readers Digest, Vol. 60, pp. 95–98 (March, 1952)Google Scholar.

14 Journal of Philippine Statistics, Vol. 5, Table 5 (Nov.–Dec., 1952)Google Scholar.

15 “Philippine Elections”, World Today, Chatham House Review, pp. 508–10 (Dec., 1953)Google Scholar.

16 Ty, Leon O., “Peaceful Revolution”, Philippines Free Press, Manila, Nov. 21, 1953, p. 4Google Scholar.

17 Ibid., p. 65.

18 Philippines Free Press, Manila, Oct. 31, 1953, p. 11Google Scholar.

19 Ty, L. O., “Day of Reckoning”, Philippines Free Press, Manila, Nov. 14, 1963, p. 5Google Scholar.

20 Summaries of his speeches are to be found in Philippines Free Press, Manila Times, Daily Mirror, Daily Record, Evening News, Manila Chronicle, Manila Daily Bulletin, and Philippines Herald.

21 Mimeographed publications of the organizations and articles in Philippines Free Press.

22 A scatter diagram of the percentage of the total vote for Magsaysay and the percentage of families living in dwellings of light materials shows a slight negative relationship between these two variables, but the high Magsaysay provinces spread over the whole range. In other words, Magsaysay got a high vote in both prosperous and poor provinces.

23 See map.

24 Philippines Free Press, Manila, Vol. 44, pp. 1–3 (Oct. 24, 1953)Google Scholar.

25 Gosnell, “Filipinos Hold Free Election” (cited in note 3).

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.